California: Nestlé’s Water Permit Expired 27 Years Ago

Last month, California newspaper The Desert Sun published an investigation revealing that Nestlé Water’s permit to transport water across the San Bernardino National Forest for bottling has been expired since 1988.

...

The latest Sun investigation also notes that the California Forest Service has never monitored the impacts of the bottled water business on streams in two watersheds that Nestlé draws from, which supply water to sensitive wildlife habitats. The Forest Service now says it plans to carry out an environmental analysis of the operations.

“Now that it has been brought to my attention that the Nestlé permit has been expired for so long, on top of the drought ... it has gone to the top of the pile in terms of a program of work for our folks to work on,” San Bernardino National Forest Supervisor Jody Noiron told the Sun.

Renewing Nestlé’s permit could take up to 18 months, or more than two years, according to Noiron.

Water Permit Expired 27 Years Ago

-
OPINION: That Ain't the Bad-News

This Is:

Almost everyone agrees: for a drought this severe, you need a multifaceted approach.

"Desal[ination] is part of it and sewage recycling is part of it," Famiglietti says. "More efficient irrigation, better water pricing, better crop choices — there's all sorts of things we need to include in our portfolio to bridge that gap between supply and demand."

...

But here's what scares a lot of people:

Even an all-of-the-above strategy isn't going to be enough.

A Totally Artificial World Of Water Use

-
Previously:

California's Water ( finally? ) Going MSM ...
.

Do you blame nestle' for letting the permit expire, or the state inspectors that failed to do their job for 27 years?

a reply to: FarleyWayne

Propobably the reason this went on for so long is Nestle is number 2 in sales to Arrowhead a 100 year old company in Los Angeles using Cartesian well the natives used for centuries.

They got under the radar is the reason...and stayed there very quietly.

Nestle Waters North America responded to the petition in a statement, emphasizing that its total water use in California last year — about 705 million gallons — is roughly the amount of water needed to irrigate two golf courses.

705 million gal equals about 90 billion fl oz. The daily "recommended" intake of water is 64 fl oz.

90 billion fluid ounces divided by 64 fl oz equals 1.5 billion people that can get their daily intake once.

The population of California is 38 million.

That means the amount of water that Nestle took in one year was equivalent to the entire population of California getting their daily "recommended" intake for about 40 days. Many people don't need that amount to survive comfortably. We take in water from the foods we eat as well.

The dry season lasts for about half of the year from April to October and if rationed correctly this may have helped California get through some tough times.

The states lack of oversight and Nestle obviously not doing the right thing, makes me wonder if those numbers are even accurate. They cook the books and then tell a tale of sustainability.

Follow the money...

They'll kill us all if it puts them on top.



It's a shame we can't change it- it might not be too late for mass executions if we all pulled together.

Best of luck.

a reply to: FarleyWayne

Being a CA native and current resident, I will take a bottle of water over a Nestle Crunch bar hands down!!

I am having lunch tomorrow with a city councilman from the area and will definitely bring this into the chitchat.

Thanks for the info. S & F x 1000 for you!

is it not water is not a right

yea what do u expect

originally posted by: lordcomac
Follow the money...

They'll kill us all if it puts them on top.



It's a shame we can't change it- it might not be too late for mass executions if we all pulled together.

Best of luck.

Rather put 'em away in a cell with general population..for life. All an execution does is prove you can kill just like them.

www.youtube.com...

Do you think Nestle really cares what they do?

originally posted by: Hoosierdaddy71
Do you blame nestle' for letting the permit expire, or the state inspectors that failed to do their job for 27 years?

Both, but mostly the state for not doing it's job.

I say both because it would be nice for Corporations to actually do the right thing too, but for some reason we've made cheating and stealing when possible part of normal business.

a reply to: mOjOm

As per the video I posted in my last post, of course nestle cheated. Their CEO does not believe that water is a human right. He believes that corporations should own every last drop of freshwater and that people should have to pay for it. A BASIC SURVIVAL NEED should all be priced apparently. These people are just maniacs.

a reply to: eisegesis

You use more water in a day than just the amount you drink. Drinking water is actually at the bottom of the list when it comes to water usage. Water is used in the production and transport of just about every product you use, and food uses a lot of water. 1 pound of beef uses 1800 gallons of water, 1 pound of rice uses 220 gallons of water, 1 pound of chicken uses. It takes a gallon of water to produce a single almond.

I've said it before, and I'll repeat it. Cutting back showers, watering your lawn less, not giving out complimentary water in restaurants... these things are all extremely minor. You could make up for all of that by replacing a cheeseburger a week with a bowl of rice.

What California is ultimately going to have to do, is kick out the meat production to wetter climates and stick to fruits and vegetables, maybe even hemp.

originally posted by: Hoosierdaddy71
Do you blame nestle' for letting the permit expire, or the state inspectors that failed to do their job for 27 years?

Both are at fault. Nestle for taking water from an area that can't afford it, and doing so illegally. And the state that allowed it in order to keep the business in the area. I can't say which party is worse here, they're both guilty.

a reply to: Aazadan






What California is ultimately going to have to do is increase water storage,plain and simple.

a reply to: Aazadan

That is starting to happen already. There are lot's of ranchers that have sold off their cattle already because they don't have the water for them. Not only that there are many farmers who instead of growing crops this year are just selling their water down south because they can make more off selling their water than they can using it for farming. That means more expensive produce for everyone because less will be produced.

On another note, IMO people probably use more water daily by flushing toilets. It's anywhere from 2 to 5 gallons a flush. I would imagine that accounts for more than watering lawns, showers and drinking per person per day.

When I lived in the mountains and had to transport water to my house everyday from down the road I learned that real quick. It wasn't drinking or cooking or even showering that used up the water, it was flushing the toilet. When you have to haul the water yourself just to watch it flush away you find many ways to only flush when needed.

originally posted by: Sunwolf
a reply to: Aazadan






What California is ultimately going to have to do is increase water storage,plain and simple.

Desalinization is a very short term solution. It only works for the states along the coast, and when water shortages really start happening it won't be limited to just coastline. It will work for California but not many other places.

a reply to: Aazadan



I never mentioned desalinization,I meant increased water storage capacity,I don`t know,maybe for those times that we get way too much rain and snowpack and have a huge lake in the central valley that we have to pump out to the sea via the San Joaquin river?

Around 70 something % of this planet is covered in Water, ever single drop of it once treated is drinkable...What's the problem.?

originally posted by: Soloprotocol
Around 70 something % of this planet is covered in Water, ever single drop of it once treated is drinkable...What's the problem.?

It's too expensive to implement at the moment compared to just letting things go to hell because those who can afford such efforts aren't being hurt by it yet. The area of Cali. that is hit the hardest is also the most poor area in terms of wealth per person. There are those wealthy farmers however that are in trouble too but their wealth is a buffer for now while they decide whether to fight for water or just bail out while their ahead. That's my opinion anyway.

I suspect that the bulk of the water that Nestle bottles is going to human or pet consumption. I have no problem with that during a drought. Nestle should just get up to date on their water permit, that's all.